Why would you NOT want to be Anglican?

[1234]

I am at a loss to understand your comment.

There is no insult in at all in stating the fact that, while the 28th Article clearly is against transubstantiation, there are high church Anglicans who hold that belief. LIkewise, it is no insult to say that some believe in consubstantiation and some hold to the belief that there is no change at all.

The insult was directed at the Episcopal church, which is looking more like Universalists every day. For that I am truly sorry.

…er…as a backsliding Unitarian Universalist, i can say the following:

Unitarianism denied the Trinity, whence their name. God is One, not three. No one knows what the Trinity ‘is’, anyway, but if you believe than Jesus was not simply a human, you might be a Trinitarian.

Universalists believe in universal salvation–ie. no hell. Eventually we all will be saved, Hitler, the works. It turns out that many, ?most? people don’t believe in hell, including Christians. Maybe purgatory by that or any other name, but not hell. There are a lot more Universalists around than you would think.

I would suspect that most Anglicans believe that Jesus was a god in some form. I don’t know about their beliefs in hell.

 

[flameburns623]

It’s going to happen, flame. High Anglicans flirt with Rome, always have, always will. I can’t understand why they’d put on their water wings–the injunction against ‘artificial’ birth control would see to that, plus papal infallibility…plus…well, never mind–but these things aren’t impediments to the water-prone. These people, mainly MEN, pardon my prejudice, aren’t aware of the realities, but it happens, since Newman, it’s happened and will continue to do so.

They ignore the trad Anglos groups out there, which are probably growing-. Maybe the priest wants to remain a priest–easy in the RC church with the shortage–FIFTY Episcopal priests have converted in the US in recent years and become RC priests, a real boon to the RC’s.

What are ‘water wings’? Or is that a pun directed at the expression ‘swimming the Tiber’?

The priest who left is something like 75 years old, and not really able to manage the demands of a priestly lifestyle any longer. I actually asked about that. In addition to the impediment of advanced age, I was told that the RCC very rarely accepts Anglican priests or other ministers. That’s not the impression I get from other sources, but it’s what was told to me.

I think that the attraction to the Latin mass says it all–that’s what he–they–wanted all along.

The conservative wing of Episcopalianism already argues rather fiercely for the preservation of ‘traditional forms and language’: we retain the Elizabethan ‘Thee’ and ‘Thou’ in addressing Deity, for instance, and retain such traditional forms as the doxology to the Lord’s Prayer ('For Thine is the Kingdom . . . . '). Most of us are KJV-Only at least so far as liturgical usage is concerned. Latin serves the same function in the RCC, roughly, as ‘traditional language’ within Episcopalianism.

 

[flameburns623]

…er…as a backsliding Unitarian Universalist, i can say the following:

Unitarianism denied the Trinity, whence their name. God is One, not three. No one knows what the Trinity ‘is’, anyway, but if you believe than Jesus was not simply a human, you might be a Trinitarian.

Universalists believe in universal salvation–IE. no hell. Eventually we all will be saved, Hitler, the works. It turns out that many, ?most? people don’t believe in hell, including Christians. Maybe purgatory by that or any other name, but not hell. There are a lot more Universalists around than you would think.

I would suspect that most Anglicans believe that Jesus was a god in some form. I don’t know about their beliefs in hell.

MOST Anglicans are Trinitarian and orthodox with respect to what is found in the early Creeds. Many priests in The Episcopal Church (main body of Anglicans in the USA) are somewhat more heterodox, but it would be hard to argue that MOST of them are heretics in that sense. The majority of Episcopal clergy are probably NOT in consonance with John Shelby Spong, who is just a radical example of the drift of Episcopalianism from it’s roots.

What really separates traditionalist Anglicans from mainstream members of The Episcopal Church are things like liturgical reform, Biblical inerrancy, abortion ‘rights’, ordination of women and active homosexuals, and the legitimization of ‘alternative lifestyles’.

 

[GKC]

MOST Anglicans are Trinitarian and orthodox with respect to what is found in the early Creeds. Many priests in The Episcopal Church (main body of Anglicans in the USA) are somewhat more heterodox, but it would be hard to argue that MOST of them are heretics in that sense. The majority of Episcopal clergy are probably NOT in consonance with John Shelby Spong, who is just a radical example of the drift of Episcopalianism from it’s roots.

What really separates traditionalist Anglicans from mainstream members of The Episcopal Church are things like liturgical reform, Biblical inerrancy, abortion ‘rights’, ordination of women and active homosexuals, and the legitimization of ‘alternative lifestyles’.

That’s me, all right.

It was the liturgical problem that started it, for me.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus

 

[AlegreFe]

If you read the Aramaic version that our brother Catholics the Maronites, Chaldeans, and Syrians read you will see this:

“I say, I to you, you are Rock on which Rock I will build my Church the gates of hell shall not surround.” All of the ‘you’ s here are in the singular. I don’t see how anyone can make any other meaning out of this then what the Catholic Church has always taught. This is the truth, which is why the Holy Spirit has protected this truth in the Church, makes the Church teach this truth to this day and inspired this truth to be put into the Gospel. The Catholic interpretation is the only one that makes any sense at all, AT ALL.

Amen! Amen!

 

[AlegreFe]

So then, sexual abuse against children is perfect? Glad I left when I did!

She said the Bride of Christ is perfect, therefore also the Church is perfect. The Body of Christ is perfect.

What you are saying cannot compare. You are talking about the people in the Church. The Church is full is “sick” people in need of a physician. We have the best physician of all, Jesus Christ. And He is here when the Priest gives a Mass. Jesus is here when the Priest hears our confession in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The Priest is standing in Persona Christi. So when I go to Confession it is Jesus that is there absolving me of my sins. I go for a “check up” and I get my “doctor’s orders” so that I can be healthy once again… until the following week or two. So it is I that is NOT perfect. It is YOU that is NOT perfect. You cannot say that the Church that is the Bride of Christ is not perfect. Watch what you say. The Holy Spirit does not like that you bad mouth His perfect Bride. Jesus is watching and listening so be careful what comes out of your mouth.

I can say one thing, I’m also glad that you left. It saddens me but until you heal you cannot be here. We already have enough bad Catholics in the Church. So I will pray for your healing and conversion and I hope that you come back soon with a different understanding of what you had with the Catholic Church.

 

[Catholic_Mike]

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding here, but I have read many posts on this forum that state very clearly that the RC church has never, ever made an error in teaching. These people insist that regardless of the sins or questionable holiness of past popes, that when it came to their duties as head of the church and their interpretation and implentation of dogmatic decisions, that there was never any mistake made. I find this pretty impossible to believe, that is all I am saying.

Just to split hairs a little, based on my personal understanding. Infallibility is a narrow thing and “duties as head of the church” might be a bit too broad. I think it’s possible for a pope to do a ****** job, and that there are historical examples of that. There are many ways a pope can screw up that wouldn’t corrupt the teaching of the church - though unfortunately these things often distract from it.

As for how believable it is… eh, I’d say it’s better to ask whether God could have set it up this way, and whether there is evidence that he did or didn’t. I’m sure God could have established his Church lots of different ways, and most that people claim He did use involve some elements that seem kind of unbelievable to me. I just think the best evidence is that God picked the setup we call Catholicism.

 

[1234]

Do you have any evidence for this accusation? In any case, nobody thinks that the Pope “founded” the Catholic Church - it was founded by Christ.

It has sinners in it, but it was not originally established upon the excusing of sin.

I’m sort of curious about this, myself.

I, personally, wouldn’t want to join any organization which had so many bad applies in it over the years… It’s bad enough just being a member of the human race, but we don’t have any choice.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

I, personally, wouldn’t want to join any organization which had so many bad applies in it over the years… It’s bad enough just being a member of the human race, but we don’t have any choice.

Better just stay home and not join anything, then. The “bad” popes in the Church’s history stand out like sore thumbs because there really aren’t that many of them. There have been bad bishops and bad priests and bad pastors and bad deacons and bad laity in every single Christian church in the last 2000 years. The Church is not a Perfect Place for Perfect People, it is a hospital for sinners. Why go with any other than the one Christ founded on His Apostles?

 

[1234]

She said the Bride of Christ is perfect, therefore also the Church is perfect. The Body of Christ is perfect.

What you are saying cannot compare. You are talking about the people in the Church. The Church is full is “sick” people in need of a physician. We have the best physician of all, Jesus Christ. And He is here when the Priest gives a Mass. Jesus is here when the Priest hears our confession in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The Priest is standing in Persona Christi. So when I go to Confession it is Jesus that is there absolving me of my sins. I go for a “check up” and I get my “doctor’s orders” so that I can be healthy once again… until the following week or two. So it is I that is NOT perfect. It is YOU that is NOT perfect. You cannot say that the Church that is the Bride of Christ is not perfect. Watch what you say. The Holy Spirit does not like that you bad mouth His perfect Bride. Jesus is watching and listening so be careful what comes out of your mouth.

I can say one thing, I’m also glad that you left. It saddens me but until you heal you cannot be here. We already have enough bad Catholics in the Church. So I will pray for your healing and conversion and I hope that you come back soon with a different understanding of what you had with the Catholic Church.

Calm down, Alegre.

You don’t speak for your church and you certainly don’t speak for the holy spirit, whatever that is.

 

[1234]

Better just stay home and not join anything, then.

My solution also.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

My solution also.

And this gives glory and honor and praise to God in what way?

I went back and added some more to my post while you were replying, btw.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

As above, just wanted to know why not?

Peace and love

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I would love to be ​

I have immense respect for the C of E - but the good in it is often not newsworthy, so people get a hideously distorted picture of it, which they then mistake for reality :crying:

 

[justinthemartyr]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the anglican church built on the divorce of Henry VIII?

And did the church of england make Brittney Speares a saint?

Let me know how accurate I am on this.

Also, was it the church of England that made contraception okay for the first time in Christendom?

 

[GKC]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the anglican church built on the divorce of Henry VIII?

And did the church of england make Brittney Speares a saint?

Let me know how accurate I am on this.

Also, was it the church of England that made contraception okay for the first time in Christendom?

I like the Britney part.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[CHCatholic]

I’m not Anglican because any split with the Catholic Church is based on pride…that man thinks he can run Christ’s Church.
I think its an insult to Christ, you’re basically saying “The Church you established is shite, so I’m going to show you how its done”

 

[RWMorris]

As above, just wanted to know why not?

Peace and love :signofcross

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was Anglican for many years. Then Gene Robinson happened. Then the Arch Bishop of Canterbury and most of the Bishops in the US and the UK proved to be morally bankrupt. Then I did what any self-respecting protestant does in those situations; I started church shopping. I had developed a deep appreciation for liturgical worship and the Eucharist, so evangelical Christianity was out of the question, even though that’s where my roots lie (Baptist and Assembly of God, and the Christian Church). My wife bought me a copy of Rome, Sweet Home, and now you know the rest of the story.

 

[jmcrae]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the anglican church built on the divorce of Henry VIII?

That was the original root cause, yes. Modern day Anglicanism looks nothing like what Henry VIII thought he was establishing, though.

And did the church of england make Brittney Speares a saint?

This, I hadn’t heard. It sounds like something Bishop John Spong would do, but (if he, or someone like him, did do this) I don’t know how much actual authority he has in the matter of proclaiming Saints.

Also, was it the church of England that made contraception okay for the first time in Christendom?

Yes; that occurred in 1930 at the Lambeth Conference.

 

[AlegreFe]

Calm down, Alegre.

You don’t speak for your church and you certainly don’t speak for the holy spirit, whatever that is.

emphasis AlegreFe’s

You can call me Sandy.

I can most certainly speak for Jesus Christ’s Church. It’s not my Church. I’m just part of it, and I thank God that I am.

Everything I said is true. There are other people here that agree so why don’t you tell them that they can’t speak for Christ’s Church? I don’t speak when I speak of the Church, the Holy Spirit speaks through me. Now sometimes I might say the wrong thing and it certainly isn’t the Holy Spirit when I say something wrong. But I can assure you that what I said in my previous post is true.

 

[AlegreFe]

I, personally, wouldn’t want to join any organization which had so many bad applies in it over the years… It’s bad enough just being a member of the human race, but we don’t have any choice.

If that’s the case then you really can’t “join” anything.

Every “organization,” every “church,” every “institution” has “bad apples” in it.